Ecumenical discussion founded upon historic Christian orthodoxy

Reformed Resourcement

There is an interesting series of posts discussing the recent “Denominational Renewal” conference over at Common Grounds Online. They come from a variety of perspectives, with both positive and negative criticisms of the conference.

Though the conference was limited to the PCA (and its speakers all maintained that PCA was basically founded on the right principles in need mostly of an attitude adjustment, whereas our own commentators might hold it to be a slightly more periphereal movement in the scope of Reformed orthodoxy), I think there are still some important overlapping concerns to be noted. For instance, one comment calls for a sort of “Reformed Resourcement.” This is exactly what we would like to see as well, and in fact, we’ve been planning on running a series of posts that investigate just that. A few thoughts come to mind:

Reformed Resourcement must deal with real history. It cannot relegate real-time people and events to “ideologies,” nor can it be content with a theological communitarianism where each tradition colors within its own confessional lines and promises not to bother the other. Our project will seek to make some universal truth claims.

In keeping with this idea, Reformed Resourcement must be willing to question our current lines of demarcation. Is it really true that the Puritans were Reformed and their Anglican opponents were not? Is it true that the most extreme branches of the tradition are the most faithful?

Reformed Resourcement will also only be as ecumenical or unecumenical as the Reformers were. If it is true that they were all sectarians, then a recovery of their ideas can hardly fail to note that. Or, more happily, if they were more ecumenically minded than the present age, so too must the project be. I suspect that the reality will be a little of both. The Reformers were not interested in unity with idolatry, but they were willing to relegate certain doctrines, now much beloved, to the realm of adiaphora.

Another key point will be to get beyond our current departmentalization of knowledge. The Reformation was magisterial, meaning that it involved the magistrates. To properly understand the Reformed churches, we will have to understand the Reformed commonwealths. America has done a poor job at this, opting instead to discover faithful remnants that set the stage for the American project.

Perhaps the final challenge will be in deciding how much of the tradition can be carried over, and what parts will require appropriate modification, even if only mutatismutandis.

Once we can become clear on the parameters of this project, then we will be free to offer observations and critiques on other competing movements, but no sooner. Look for a solid intro post on this by our friend Peter Escalante in the week to come. It would be great if we could attract a broader Evangelical audience to interact.

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

One Response

Am I the only one that sees great irony in talking about a Reformed Ressourcement within the context of denominational renewal? As the old children’s show used to say, “One of these things is not like the other”.